Anyone interested 150mb down 35mb up?

[#1]

Well im annoyed now because i am too, it seems were still way behind and a yankie will afterall thrash me yet again with his tiny fibre wire to his home.
http://www22.verizon.com/Residential/Bundles/Landing/fiosinternet_ultimate/fiosinternet_ultimate.htm
They get everything better
I now feel like some donkey in some undeveloped country with my 20 down 1 up
im a laughing stock

[#2]

Yes but you're not paying £130 a month for your internet connection are you.

[#3]

Comon though, imagine your games never lagging online and having the edge againsts everyone else, a yank over the pond can now have the edge against me, thats worth the money, and besides, that connection, you could share it between a few neighbours and still have blazing speeds and shared costs

[#4]

As I'm married to a "yank" and have family over there who have had services through Verizon I'd take their claims with a pinch of salt - OK so my family over there live out in the sticks where their neighbours are several hundred yards away and maybe Verizon's services in the inner city are a lot better but.....

[#5]

If it makes you feel better it's possible for you to get 1Gb internet in the UK.  Price is in the "omg" stage though as the company charges £999/month for 100Mb Ethernet internet.
Mind you, you could get a property which is FTTP (100Mb) and find an ISP that'll let you bond two lines for 200Mb internet cheaper than the US 150Mb service.
When it comes to gaming however, speed isn't the issue, it's ping, try to find servers that are in the UK or Europe for lower pings as an American on 512k will beat you, even if you're on Fibre, if the server is in the US.

[#6]

[#7]

i get a ping of 10ms every now and again on speedtest.net interesting conversation though, and for the one married to the "yank" i actually love the new yorkers realy honest

[#8]

Broadband ping has nothing to do with the speed of the connection but how far you are from the exchange and how good the routing is to where ever.  No point in having a Porsche if you drive it on the M25.  It's the one gripe I have with BT's current advert, claiming you will have the upper hand in gaming, thats bull.

[#9]

It's more the distance to the servers, I play FFXI and the servers are located in Japan, a tracert gives an idea of what happens:

  6    49 ms    52 ms    60 ms  10gigabitethernet1-1.core1.lon1.he.net [195.66.224.21]
  7   113 ms   117 ms   127 ms  10gigabitethernet7-4.core1.nyc4.he.net [72.52.92.77]

As you can see when it travels from the UK to the US (New York by the looks of it) the ping doubles, well more than doubles but we'll say doubles.  By the time it gets to the East coast which I think is Los Angeles the ping is up to 190 but then:

 9   190 ms   186 ms   190 ms  pacnet.10gigabitethernet2-3.core1.lax1.he.net [26.218.223.206]
10   296 ms   296 ms   299 ms  po15-1-0.cr1.nrt1.asianetcom.net [202.147.0.165]

Going across the pacific adds over 100ms to the ping, luckily FFXI isn't ping heavy like an FPS.  If however I were to play TF2 on a JP server I'd probably not rank very high!  If anyone on fibre could tracert the same IP (202.67.56.0) they should see similar results to mine.

[#10]

Most yanks are on DOCSIS or fibre. Both are inferior to fast path dsl for latency afaik.
Fibre has forced interleaving which is why those BT Infinity ads saying faster gaming make me laugh
The distance to the server is another major factor ofc...

[#11]

Quote from: Gus

Broadband ping has nothing to do with the speed of the connection but how far you are from the exchange and how good the routing is to where ever.

Not totally true. When you do a test ping from the command line the packet size is very small hence the time to transmit the package is less significant that the distance from the server. However as the package size increases the time to transmit the package becomes more significant. This illustrates the point:

C:\Users\John>ping ntp.plus.net
Pinging ntp.plus.net [212.159.13.49] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 212.159.13.49: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=251
Reply from 212.159.13.49: bytes=32 time=16ms TTL=251
Reply from 212.159.13.49: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=251
Reply from 212.159.13.49: bytes=32 time=16ms TTL=251
Ping statistics for 212.159.13.49:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 13ms, Maximum = 16ms, Average = 15ms
C:\Users\John>ping -l 4096 ntp.plus.net
Pinging ntp.plus.net [212.159.13.49] with 4096 bytes of data:
Reply from 212.159.13.49: bytes=4096 time=67ms TTL=251
Reply from 212.159.13.49: bytes=4096 time=66ms TTL=251
Reply from 212.159.13.49: bytes=4096 time=67ms TTL=251
Reply from 212.159.13.49: bytes=4096 time=67ms TTL=251
Ping statistics for 212.159.13.49:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 66ms, Maximum = 67ms, Average = 66ms

When gaming the packet size will be larger than first test above (but nowhere near as big as the second), so the line speed will have some effect. Two users an identical distance from the exchange but with different line speeds will see different latency, but probably only a few milliseconds difference. BT's advertising is probably factually correct but very much over exaggerating the benefit.